Wednesday, August 26th 2015

AMD Radeon R9 Nano Faster than GeForce GTX 980, Pricing Revealed

by
btarunr
 Discuss (111 Comments)
AMD's upcoming super-compact graphics card, the Radeon R9 Nano, will be faster than NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 980, and a whopping 30% faster than the GTX 970, according to the company. At its size, it will offer the fastest pixel-crunching solution for compact ITX/SFF gaming PC builders, and that is something AMD want to capitalize on. If what we're hearing is true, then not only will the R9 Nano have the same core-config as the R9 Fury X, but also its price - US $649.99. At this price, the R9 Nano definitely isn't going to affect sales of the GTX 970 or GTX 980, which are currently going for as low as $299 and $465, respectively; but serve as a "halo product," targeted at SFF gaming PC builders.
Source: WCCFTech

Related News

Add your own comment

111 Comments on AMD Radeon R9 Nano Faster than GeForce GTX 980, Pricing Revealed

#51
Sony Xperia S
buggalugsYou guys are full of doom but Fury and FuryX are selling like hotcakes, they cant keep up with demand.

There is no business reason to sell them cheaper, when they cant keep up with demand at $650. It would actually be a very dumb and bad business decision to sell them cheaper at this point.
While I am sure that people are not forgetting anvidia's price tags, I am not so sure that Fury and Fury X have that supply in the first place.

Just give numbers or proof that there are cards actually going to sale.
Posted on Reply
#52
Assimilator
buggalugsYou guys are full of doom but Fury and FuryX are selling like hotcakes, they cant keep up with demand.

Even at $650 for nano AMD will struggle with demand for the first few months. There is no business reason to sell them cheaper, when they cant keep up with demand at $650. It would actually be a very dumb and bad business decision to sell them cheaper at this point.
The reason they can't keep up with demand is that there were a grand total of 30,000 Fiji cards available at launch. The reason they aren't selling the cards cheaper is that they literally cannot; Fiji is massive and complex, and its yields are appalling (which ties back into availability). That's why we have the rebranded 290/X to cover lower price points - because not enough working Fiji chips get produced for those prices.
buggalugsSome of you guys also seem to be forgetting , this is the fastest card of all time in this form factor, and the best performance to watt card of all time.
According to AMD.
buggalugsAfter the 980Ti, AMD have the next 3 fastest cards, and theres not much between 980Ti and FuryX anyway, AMD's pricing is pretty standard for this performance. Pricing doesnt seem to be an issue when Nvidia release cards, but when AMD does it, its a problem for some reason, and AMD arent even as bad as Nvidia with their $1,000 and $1,200 cards. weird
I agree completely that a $650 Fiji is much better value for money than a $1,000 Titan whatever-it's-called-this-time. I also believe that anyone who buys a Titan is a moron with too much cash. Unfortunately, as Apple has proven, you can make a very successful business selling overpriced products to cash-flush morons; all nVIDIA is doing with Titan is getting a piece of that moron pie.
Posted on Reply
#53
wickedcricket
ScrizzObviously someone was smoking the good stuff....
Smoking??? You meant snorting and for that price it must have been a really good stuff...
Posted on Reply
#54
Sony Xperia S
AssimilatorAccording to AMD.
What do you think is faster ?

W1zzard should put a new review with R9 Nano soon, no ?
Posted on Reply
#55
Fluffmeister
Priced the same as a 980 Ti I should bloody well hope it's faster than a GTX 980.
Posted on Reply
#56
64K
Sony Xperia SWhat do you think is faster ?

W1zzard should put a new review with R9 Nano soon, no ?
I believe the NDA is lifted at 8:00 EST so we may see a review in about 20 minutes or so.
Posted on Reply
#57
Crap Daddy
Management has gone completely mad at AMD. So, they put the fully enabled monster chip which needs water cooling in a SFF card, cripple it with aggressive power target in order to reach the advertised TDP thus bringing it down in terms of performance to GM204, a chip almost half of Fiji. To make matters worse, understandable somehow because they have to have some sort of a profit, they price it at 980Ti level. This is a boutique product made by AMD which is heading fast to become a boutique company.
Posted on Reply
#58
Tsukiyomi91
What AMD should do is not raise the price of their rebranded chips, but to make an entirely new one based on existing model, like what Nvidia did with their Maxwell, which is based on Kepler only better at power consumption & efficiency. If (and only IF) AMD did that before they released the R9 series cards, it would give Nvidia a really good competition. Sadly though, it didn't happen & thinking refurbishing old chips would keep them afloat. IMO, this isn't going to cut.
Posted on Reply
#59
Prima.Vera
AssimilatorI agree completely that a $650 Fiji is much better value for money than a $1,000 Titan whatever-it's-called-this-time. I also believe that anyone who buys a Titan is a moron with too much cash. Unfortunately, as Apple has proven, you can make a very successful business selling overpriced products to cash-flush morons; all nVIDIA is doing with Titan is getting a piece of that moron pie.
Posted on Reply
#60
Basard
im gonnna have a heart attack, it's 7:01 central! where's nano?! lol...
Posted on Reply
#61
Lucas_
omg :( AMD wont Recover Again :( 699 $ thats not Fair .
Posted on Reply
#62
EarthDog
Sony Xperia SI told some other members but they keep arguing with me. In fact, after reading all your posts, it turns that you, guys, have the same opinion like me.

Everyone EXPECTS cheaper prices. 450$ is perfectly fine.

650$ is a stupid joke. :(

Thank you, AMD, but indeed you are not thinking with your heads.
You thought it would be $450 in that other thread...

I feel $549 would be fair since it performs like their $549 Fury for all intents and purposes. Much faster than those that were expecting 290x/390x performance though!!!!
Posted on Reply
#63
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
EarthDogI feel $549 would be fair since it performs like their $549 Fury for all intents and purposes. Much faster than those that were expecting 290x/390x performance though!!!!
AMD is contradicting itself left and right. First they release a performance slide showing the Nano just barely beating a 290X, now they are pricing it super high and saying it performs better than a 980. I'll wait the reviews and hope the reviewers are smart enough to see through AMD's trick and let the card heat up.
Posted on Reply
#64
Tsukiyomi91
$650 is kinda asking too much for those who wanted a cheap but well performing VGA card... guess GTX970 is still a noteworthy card for under $400 range...
Posted on Reply
#65
Nokiron
64KI believe the NDA is lifted at 8:00 EST so we may see a review in about 20 minutes or so.
The NDA seems to be September 10th. Which does not bode well.
Posted on Reply
#67
Bytales
ScrizzObviously someone was smoking the good stuff....
You guys probably dont get that this is a top of the line chip, expensive to manufacture. >The price is to be expected. ANd i would have payed it but i got the fury X. Its the same.
Posted on Reply
#68
LightningJR
It looks like this card is for the people who want/need itx sized video cards and you pay a premium for it.. Price/performance will be a failure if it's the measure you look at with this card..
Posted on Reply
#69
EarthDog
NokironThe NDA seems to be September 10th. Which does not bode well.
Why not?

We were told on the call that they are 'building up stock' essentially.
Posted on Reply
#70
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
EarthDogWhy not?

We were told on the call that they are 'building up stock' essentially.
Because if you release a card, and then say "you aren't allowed to post reviews about it" it means you are trying to hide something. It makes it seem like they are trying to get the suckers to just go out and buy the card at an inflated price that isn't justified by the performance and they don't want reviews showing the card isn't worth it.
Posted on Reply
#71
Recus
I love how argument "this is the smallest GPU" counterbalance beloved AMD fans argument "cheaper is better". lol

You can get one year old 970 Mini for $299.99 set game settings to low/medium and get 60 fps. :laugh:

Posted on Reply
#72
EarthDog
newtekie1Because if you release a card, and then say "you aren't allowed to post reviews about it" it means you are trying to hide something. It makes it seem like they are trying to get the suckers to just go out and buy the card at an inflated price that isn't justified by the performance and they don't want reviews showing the card isn't worth it.
It means reviewers dont have cards in hand yet. You wont be able to BUY a card until the 10th when reviews are allowed to be posted anyway. So, that seems to bunk that theory, no?

If it is true Fury levels give or take a percent or so, you are paying Fury X prices for it which doesn't seem right to me. I understand the premium for it as the technology is new, and it is the best of that market. But you have to admit, decent 4K performance that small is impressive. I hope prices come down to $550-$575. I think its fair to pay a bit of a premium for the smaller card.
Posted on Reply
#73
KarymidoN
RIP AMD, 650 bucks? :confused::confused::confused:
Samsung please buy AMD. Only then will we have real competition in both processors, and in GPUs. Until then is watching Nvidia / Intel dominate the market and charge the price they want and deliver the performance they want, because the "biggest competitor" simply will not be able to overcome.
Posted on Reply
#75
GhostRyder
Well we all saw this coming in the last few days because its a full fledged Fiji core. Really since this card has some limitations it should be priced around the $550 mark and the Fury regular should be $500. They are trying to market it as a full Fiji air cooled card which is cool especially if we see some custom variants that cram a bit more in that form factor, however on the stock one with only 4+1+1 power phase (Versus 6+1+1 on Fury X) this is a weird price point to sell it at.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 26th, 2024 03:12 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts